Czech New Building Act: Impact on Zoning Decisions and Permit Proceedings

The new Building Act represents a fundamental change in the management of construction projects, reshaping the rules of the game for thousands of property owners and development companies in the Czech Republic. If you have previously obtained a zoning decision under the old rules or you have ongoing building permit proceedings, it is essential to understand how the new legislation affects you, what risks it brings, and what strategy to choose to protect your interests.

The illustrative image shows experts discussing the impacts of the new Building Act.

Quick summary

  • Transitional periods are key: Proceedings not finally concluded by 30 June 2024 are completed under the existing legislation. The new rules apply only to proceedings commenced after 1 July 2024, except for reserved structures, where the change took effect earlier.
  • New structure of building administration: The establishment of the Transport and Energy Building Authority (DESÚ) brings changes to decision-making processes for major infrastructure and reserved structures. For standard projects, the competent municipal building authorities remain in place, but procedural steps change.
  • Digitalisation and new documentation requirements: The Builder’s Portal becomes a key tool. New forms of documentation and mandatory electronic communication for selected entities create a risk of technical and formal defects that may delay the permitting process.
  • Strategic protective steps: Timely analysis of the validity of older zoning decisions, their review, and preparation for potential inspections are essential to minimise the risk of missed deadlines or sanctions.

What has changed under the new legal framework

The new Building Act, which became fully effective on 1 July 2024, represents the most significant reform of construction law in the Czech Republic in decades. The aim of the Act is to speed up and simplify building permitting, primarily by merging zoning and building proceedings into a single permitting process. However, for developers and property owners who were already in the permitting process earlier, a number of questions arise regarding the validity of existing decisions.

The Act introduces the principle of “one proceeding, one stamp”, which in practice means integrating previously separate processes. A major change is the establishment of the Transport and Energy Building Authority (DESÚ), which has taken over competences for large infrastructure and strategic projects. For standard projects, such as family houses or smaller developments, municipal building authorities remain competent at first instance, but they now follow new procedural rules and deadlines.

Another key change is the introduction of digitalisation via the Builder’s Portal, which as of 1 July 2024 is the main interface for communication and document storage. The system is intended to eliminate paperwork, but during the rollout phase it requires increased attention from developers and designers to the technical requirements of submissions to avoid unnecessary returns of applications due to formal defects.

Transitional periods and their legal implications

One of the most important aspects of the transition is the regime of transitional provisions (Section 330 et seq. of the new Building Act). The Act provides that proceedings commenced before 1 July 2024 are completed under the existing legislation. This provides legal certainty for projects already underway.

However, if you have a zoning decision issued under the old Act that has not yet become final, or you plan to apply for a building permit based on an old zoning decision, the situation requires analysis. Zoning decisions issued under the old Act remain valid for the period stated in them, and you may apply for a building permit on their basis; however, the permitting procedure will already be governed procedurally by the new Building Act.

The lawyers at ARROWS, a Prague-based law firm, routinely handle situations where the validity of an old zoning decision is expiring and needs to be extended, or where older project documentation must be aligned with the new requirements for submitting an application for a project permit. An incorrect approach here may result in having to go through the entire permitting process again.

A practical view of when even a smaller project may trigger an environmental impact assessment requirement is summarised in the update EIA and development: when even a smaller project is subject to assessment.

Related questions on the transitional period and your decisions

1. Was my proceeding commenced before 1 July 2024 – will I be governed by the old Act?
Yes, the proceeding will be completed under the existing regulations (Act No. 183/2006 Coll.). However, be mindful of follow-on proceedings (e.g., final building approval), which may already be governed by the new framework depending on the date they are commenced.

2. What happens to my old zoning decision?
It remains valid for the period for which it was issued. It is regarded as a decision on part of the matter under the new Act. You can rely on it by submitting an application for a building permit.

To set the next steps (including working with documentation, deadlines, and follow-on proceedings), questions typically fall within development and construction law.

3. Do I have to redo the project documentation?
If you apply for a permit under the new Act (proceedings commenced after 1 July 2024), the documentation must meet the requirements set out in the new implementing decree on construction documentation. For older projects, an update is often necessary.

Risks associated with the reform of building administration

Although the original concept of a “Supreme Building Authority” was politically revised, the establishment of DESÚ and appellate bodies brings changes in jurisdiction. For so-called reserved structures, decisions are no longer made by the local authority but by a centralised specialised authority. This includes, for example, motorways, railways, major energy projects, as well as certain large manufacturing complexes.

If a dispute arises in a project regarding the scope of the brief or the responsibility of individual participants in preparing the construction, it may be useful to add context based on the article Did the investor give you an incorrect construction brief? Who is responsible for what, and how the court views it..

For owners of land affected by these projects, this means that the counterpart for negotiations is a more remote authority. This increases the demands for formal correctness of submissions and legal representation, as the option of informal “over-the-counter” solutions at a small municipality falls away.

For standard projects, decision-making remains with municipalities, but building authorities are now bound by stricter deadlines and new methodologies of the Ministry for Regional Development. During the transitional period, a risk for developers is inconsistent interpretation of the law by officials who are still becoming familiar with the new legislation.

The attorneys and legal teams of ARROWS, a Prague-based law firm, have experience in handling disputes in administrative proceedings and can effectively protect clients’ rights in cases of administrative inaction or improper official procedure.

Status of municipalities and parties to the proceedings

The new Building Act defines the circle of parties to the proceedings. Municipalities remain strong players as parties to the proceedings, defending the interests of local self-government and compliance with the zoning plan. In certain types of proceedings, for example in accelerated proceedings, the scope of objections may be limited.

If your construction project is controversial in the given locality, it is crucial to have a strategy prepared for addressing objections from neighbours and the municipality. The new act emphasises the concentration of proceedings; therefore, objections that are not raised in time will not be taken into account.

The expert team at ARROWS, a Prague-based law firm, will ensure the preparation of supporting documents and representation in negotiations with the municipality and neighbours. The aim is to minimise the risk of appeals and court disputes that could block the project.

Digitalisation of building proceedings and new technical risks

The Builder’s Portal is a mandatory tool for communication between authorities and concerned bodies. For individual builders (natural persons), the option of filing in paper form remains available, but for legal entities and self-employed individuals the act prefers electronic communication. Project documentation is uploaded into the system in prescribed electronic formats (e.g., PDF/A, data models).

The risk lies in the technical requirements for documentation. If the designer does not deliver the documentation in the correct standard or format, the system or the official may assess the filing as defective. Responsibility for the correctness of the filing lies with the builder, and in the first months of the system’s operation technical outages or delays have also occurred.

Related questions on digitalisation and risks for you

1. What happens if the system is not working and I miss the deadline?
If you can prove an objective technical impossibility to file on the system administrator’s side, it should not be held against you. However, we recommend not leaving filings to the last day and documenting everything thoroughly (screenshots, logs).

2. Does the project documentation have to be digital?
Yes, for the purposes of proceedings under the new act, the documentation is entered into the records electronically. The builder should contractually oblige the designer to deliver the data in the required formats.

3. Who will help me with legal issues related to electronic filing?
If the authority refuses a filing for technical reasons without justification, it is necessary to file a complaint or an appeal. An attorney specialising in Czech administrative law can assist you with this.

Changes in project documentation and their practical consequences

The new Building Act distinguishes between documentation for the approval of the intended project and documentation for the execution of the construction. Documentation for the approval of the intended project is, in many respects, less detailed than the previous documentation for a building permit. It focuses primarily on compliance with the zoning plan and the basic parameters of the construction.

This creates a risk for the implementation phase. The builder must ensure that the documentation for the execution of the construction is prepared before works begin. If, at this detailed stage, it turns out that the technical solution requires a change compared to the approved intended project, the builder must apply for an amendment to the permit, which will delay the construction.

ARROWS, a Prague-based law firm, recommends paying increased attention to contracts for work with designers and contractors. It is necessary to clearly define responsibility for consistency between the individual stages of documentation and any additional costs associated with amending the permit.

Risks and sanctions

How ARROWS can help (office@arws.cz)

Rejection of an application due to defects in the documentation: The documentation does not comply with the new implementing regulations or the technical standards of the Builder’s Portal.

Legal supervision of the process: We will ensure that your team (designer) delivers the supporting documents in line with current Czech legislation, thereby preventing procedural delays.

Carrying out construction in breach of the permit: Changes to the construction that have not been discussed lead to a suspension of the construction and fines.

Legalisation of changes: We will arrange the approval of a change to the construction before completion (ZSPD) and representation before the authority in the event of an impending sanction.

Fine for missing as-built documentation: The owner of the construction is obliged to keep documentation of the actual condition for the entire duration of the construction. A fine of up to CZK 400,000 may be imposed.

Documentation audit: We will help you verify whether your real estate portfolio meets the statutory requirements for records and building passport documentation.

Invalidation of a decision: Procedural errors during the transitional period may lead to the decision being challenged in court.

Defence in administrative litigation: We provide top-tier defence of the validity of issued permits against actions brought by associations or neighbours.

Final inspection approval in the new system

The new Building Act changes the approach to final inspection approval. For simple constructions (except those intended for housing and family recreation), the formal final inspection approval decision in the previous sense is being abandoned. For many constructions, it will be sufficient for the builder to submit the required documents after completion, and the construction may be put into use unless the authority prohibits operation.

However, a final inspection approval decision remains mandatory for certain types of projects, such as public infrastructure constructions, constructions for which trial operation has been required, and other specific categories.

Be mindful of insurance, because even if the act does not formally require a “final approval stamp” for certain constructions, insurers and banks may still require proof that the construction is lawfully in use and safe. The absence of such proof may lead to a reduction of insurance benefits.

Heritage protection and integrated decision-making

The new Building Act sought to integrate concerned bodies directly into the structure of building authorities. However, after the 2023 amendment, the model of binding opinions of heritage protection authorities remains preserved in many cases, especially in heritage reserves and zones and for cultural monuments.

It is therefore not true that heritage protection has been completely weakened. Although the building authority conducts the proceedings, in the case of protected areas it is still bound by the opinion of the heritage authorities.

The risk for investors lies in the Single Environmental Opinion (JES), which integrates a number of environmental approvals, but heritage protection in many cases still remains separate. If your project affects historic development, we recommend not underestimating preliminary consultations with the NPÚ (National Heritage Institute) and the relevant heritage protection departments.

Sanctions and risks for property owners

The new Building Act adjusts the level of fines to make them more deterrent. For an offence consisting of carrying out construction without a permit or in breach of it, a fine of up to CZK 2,000,000 may be imposed, and in the case of construction in a protected area up to CZK 4,000,000 (§ 301 et seq. of the new Building Act).

There is also an important sanction for owners of existing buildings. Failure to retain the as-built documentation or to keep it updated may result in a fine of up to CZK 400,000. This provision applies to all owners, not only to those who are currently building. Authorities may require a so-called building passport if the original documentation is missing.

Related questions on the sanction and your liability

1. Am I at risk of a fine for an older building without documentation?
Yes, the obligation to retain documentation continues to apply. If you do not have it, the authority may order you to obtain a building passport. Failure to comply with the request may result in a sanction.

2. How high is the fine for an “unauthorised building”?
It depends on the nature of the offence, the type of building and its seriousness. For constructing a building without a permit or in breach of it, a fine of up to CZK 2 million may be imposed, including for simple buildings. A lower cap of CZK 1 million applies to simple buildings only for the offence consisting in their unauthorised use (e.g., use without the required occupancy approval decision). 

3. How can I defend myself?
If offence proceedings or proceedings for removal of the building are initiated, immediate legal representation is essential. It is often possible to demonstrate good faith or find a route to obtaining a retrospective building permit.

Strategy for reviewing older decisions

If you have a decision issued under the previous Building Act, we recommend having it reviewed. It is crucial to verify the validity period, compliance with the new regulations for follow-up steps, and whether the documentation can be used for proceedings under the new Act.

The attorneys of ARROWS, a Prague-based law firm, provide legal audit services for real estate projects (Due Diligence). As part of this service, we assess the risks associated with the transition to the new legislation and propose the optimal course of action.

Digital footprint and building records

The new system introduces records of construction procedures and documentation in the National Geoportal for Spatial Planning and in public administration information systems. For you, this means that the history of your building will be transparently traceable in the future. It is therefore in your interest that the data in the system corresponds to reality.

Practical recommendations for owners and developers

Our recommendations for navigating the new system:

  • Carry out a legal audit of the building and its documentation. Especially for older properties and ongoing projects, verify that you have all permits in order and that the documentation reflects the actual state.
  • Prepare for digitalisation. Secure access to  and require designers to provide outputs in digitally compatible formats.
  • Communication with authorities. The new Act sets strict deadlines not only for authorities but also for developers. Monitor deliveries to your data box so you do not miss the deadline for an appeal.
  • As-built documentation. Do not underestimate the archiving obligation, as this is a key document when selling a property or in the event of an insured loss.
  • Insurance and liability. In view of increased sanctions and risks, review your liability insurance as well as your property insurance.

Conclusion

The new Building Act brings a revolution aimed at speeding up construction, but in the transitional phase it generates uncertainty. The combination of new procedural rules, digitalisation and the reorganisation of public administration places high demands on the professional preparation of projects.

Property owners and developers should not rely on the inertia of the old system. A proactive approach, timely review of documentation and expert legal support are the best prevention against fines and the devaluation of an investment. 

The attorneys of ARROWS, a Prague-based law firm specialising in construction law and real estate law, are ready to guide you through this complex period. If you are unsure about the status of your property or the validity of your decisions, contact ARROWS advokátní kancelář at office@arws.cz.

FAQ 

1. I have a zoning decision issued in 2023. Do I need to update it in any way?
Decisions issued before 1 July 2024 remain valid for the period specified in them. You do not need to update them, but if you want to build on their basis, you will apply for a building permit, and the proceedings will already be conducted procedurally under the new Act. The documentation for the application must comply with the new implementing decrees. For a specific assessment, contact office@arws.cz.

2. What happens if the building authority changes as a result of centralisation?
If your project falls within so-called reserved buildings (e.g., major transport or energy structures), the file is transferred to DESÚ. For standard buildings, the file remains with the municipal building authority. Decisions issued by the former authority remain valid.

3. What are the most common issues during the transitional period?
The most common issues are conflicts between old and new documentation, technical difficulties with filing via the Builder’s Portal, and uncertainty as to whether the old or new regime applies to a specific change to a building. The attorneys of ARROWS advokátní kancelář deal with these situations on a daily basis.

4. Am I at risk of a fine because my building does not have as-built documentation?
Yes, under Section 302 of the new Building Act, an individual may be fined up to CZK 400,000 if they do not retain the as-built documentation. If the documentation is missing, the authority may order you to obtain a building passport.

5. Can I verify whether my building complies with the new Building Act?
Ideally, you should have a legal and technical audit of the property prepared. This includes checking that the actual state complies with the permit, reviewing entries in the Cadastral Register, and verifying the existence of mandatory documentation. ARROWS advokátní kancelář carries out these assessments as part of Due Diligence.

6. What should I do if I receive a notice from the building authority to remedy an issue?
Respond without delay. Determine the exact reason for the notice and the deadline for remedy. Often, the situation can be resolved through a retrospective permit or passportisation without the need to remove the building. At this stage, expert legal representation is key to preventing unnecessary sanctions. Write to office@arws.cz for immediate assistance.

Disclaimer: The information contained in this article is for general informational purposes only and serves as a basic guide to the issue as of 2026. Although we strive for maximum accuracy, laws and their interpretation evolve over time. We are ARROWS Law Firm, a member of the Czech Bar Association (our supervisory authority), and for the maximum security of our clients, we are insured for professional liability with a limit of CZK 400,000,000. To verify the current wording of the regulations and their application to your specific situation, it is necessary to contact ARROWS Law Firm directly (office@arws.cz). We are not liable for any damages arising from the independent use of the information in this article without prior individual legal consultation.

Read also: